sob@bcm.tmc.edu (Stan Barber) (03/11/88)
There has been some discussion about terminal servers and the Bridge Communications products. Most of it has been "hear-say". I thought I'd take this opportunity to make some concrete comments based on our use of two versions of their software accross three products. We run a large network that uses CS/1s, CS/100s and CS/200s. We had been running XNS on the terminal servers until the end of last year when we converted the TCP (version 13000). This version of TCP/IP was functional, but no more than that. It was slow and it seemed that many useful TELNET functions were not implemented. However, it worked well enough for the month we had to wait for TCP 20000. [We were intending to convert to 20000 directly, but Bridge was delayed in getting it to us.] One useful feature was the addition of permanent virtual circuits. This made remote printers easy to do. The new version was MUCH better than the older version. Flow control was much more responsive (flow stops within a couple of bytes). TELNET's binary option was now available (useful for some types of file transfers and graphics). Throughput was MUCH improved. Additionally, a rich macro language has been added as well as support for the Domain Name Service. Until recently, I was only marginally satisfied with the Bridge product. Now, I am quite pleased with it. My only major remaining complaint is the lack of support for a non-proprietary system logging function. I have suggested that they make their log information available to the unix syslog function. I hope they will. Stan Barber, Baylor College of Medicine Stan internet: sob@tmc.edu Baylor College of Medicine Olan uucp: {rice,killer,hoptoad}!academ!sob Barber Opinions expressed are only mine.
cracraft@venera.isi.edu (Stuart Cracraft) (03/24/88)
In article <1035@uni2.bcm.tmc.edu> sob@bcm.tmc.edu (Stan Barber) writes: >Until recently, I was only marginally satisfied with the Bridge product. Now, >I am quite pleased with it. My only major remaining complaint is the lack >of support for a non-proprietary system logging function. I have suggested >that they make their log information available to the unix syslog function. >I hope they will. > >Stan Barber, Baylor College of Medicine > I'll second the kudo for Bridge. It's a good, solid product. We've had smooth operation from it. Stuart